Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1975 10-28 Beam avenue rezone effort snarls again REVIEW Minnesota39 TU ES., OCT. 28, 1975 Beam avenue rezone effort s a ain by Scott Carlson same restrictions for property owners on property owners that whatever restric- The latest in a series of recent attempts the north side of Beam avenue as on the tions the city may appear to desire on to rezone the south side of Beam avenue south side of Beam. development of property may be far between White Bear avenue and But an assessment hearing more than a outshadowed in the future by Hazelwood failed by a 4-1 vote of the year ago had property owners to the north requirements of the Ramsey-Washington Maplewood city council last Thursday picking up five-eights of the total costs, Metropolitan Watershed Board.Property night. Schreier added. owners to the south side of Beam avenue Second reading of an ordinance to Schreier,who called the overlay district would have a drainage ditch to contend rezone the property from Farm restrictions "inequitable,"said, "I never with. Residential (FR) to Business Com- heard that there would be an overlay zone Greavu sided with the property owners mercial(BC)received only the support of for the entire parcel of property that is in their objections to the overlay district. councilman John Greavu. already zoned." "To bring in this overlay district is idiotic But the council's vote was actually The local businessman told the coun- and to bring it in for the whole area is anticlimactic as any chance of the rezone cilmen that he will be paying up to$1.30 ridiculous," Greavu said. realistically hinged on approval of an per square foot in assessments. "The Councilman Norman Anderson first area-wide "overlay district" in the property just isn't worth that kind of asked that Tousley and other property Maplewood Mall area. Due to the strong money,"he said. "Now we're faced with owners to the north be kept out of a protest of many property owners, the more restrictions on the property." rezone. When Mayor Robert Bruton council unanimously rejected the overlay Schreier indicated that he has some pointed out that the motion was imp- district ordinance, which would apply to $83,000 in assessments facing him. "We propriate Anderson suggested that the other parts of the city too. Some coun- might as well mail you a deed for the area of the overlay district be reduced. cilmen said it was too restrictive. property and save ourselves some City Attorney John Bannigan told the The council, in previous attempts, had headaches," he said. council that it could reduce the overlay considered on separate occasions Robert Hajicek, 1700 E. County Rd. D, district. But he asked the councilmen to rezoning the south side of Beam avenue to said the restrictions were scaring consider that a reduction might disad- Limited Business Commercial(LBC)and businesses away from Maplewood. vantage the people on the south side of Commercial Office District (COD). But Beam avenue. those alternatives were rejected. "I can appreciate zealous guarding of "I'd rather send it (the overlay or- The attempt to approve a BC rezone this development property," Hajicek dinance) back rather than adopting it in with an overlay district, which would admitted."You want to make it good.But some piece-meal fashion," Wiegert in- require special conditions,was seen as an there is a point in overdoing it." terjected. effort by the council to compromise. Hajicek added the overlay district gives Councilman Burton Murdock, in Property owners,who have complained of prospective merchants no idea on what commenting on the council's position, high assessments, have told the council may or may not be considered ap- said,"I think the council's original intent that a rezone of BC is essential if they are propriate for the area."We'll have a hard was to create an area of quality, good to have any chance to sell their property time selling that property under those looks and tasteful development. I believe and pay off the assessments.The council, conditions," he said. we all have that same attitude. on the other hand, wants to prevent the Businessman Herb Tousley told the "I don't believe we've detered from our street from turning into a"South Robert" council that it would be morally unfair to . position any," Murdock continued. "But strip development. include his 10 acre parcel of property, there are some inequalities in this thing But last Thursday night it seemed that which is just immediately south of that are so outstanding that it's just un- the overlay plan developed by the city Interstate 694, in the overlay district believable." staff and the planning commission wound because the land was annexed from White Murdock added, "I think we've lost the up pleasing very few people. Bear Lake with the understanding that intent of this ordinance.We've put it in the Dick Schreier,2125 DeSoto,pointed out the same zoning would apply. hands of people (the council) who can that the overlay district was putting the Tousley said he wants to develop the administer it any way they want." property but that's "tough to do with In an attempt hopefully to resolve the more restrictions."And he warned that a difficult rezoning problem the council has "capricious council" in the future could asked the planning commission to come deny what is a legitimate plan today. up with variations of BC zoning. It has An attorney, who represented two been the council's concern that un- prospective property buyers within the desirable businesses such as used car lots overlay district,said that the restrictions and fast-food restaurants be kept out of put up a new "hoop" for businessmen to the area. hurdle through. "At a certain point it's The council said it plans to meet with easier to build somewhere else,"he said. the planning commission to work out Councilman Donald Wiegert told the something that is acceptable.